Digital BW, The Print

does a high quality  group exist for scanners/scanning like this group 
exists for b&w digital printing?

thanks

dennis

Hi gang,

I was on this group for a couple of months and then have been gone 
for 8 months. I missed the wealth of information here. I'm preparing 
to take the giant leap into making the best prints I can make. I'll 
be commiting to some kind of CIS, probably some profiles and 
calibration tools, new camera gear, new monitor etc etc.

First up though is a new scanner. I have some budget limitations to 
around $1000 for a scanner. I'm looking at the Canon FS4000 and the 
Nikon Coolscan in the same price range. Any opinons would be much 
appreciated as well as suggestions for other scanners that might be 
better. Right now I'm pretty much limited to the 35mm format with on 
only medium format camera being a Holga. I have an epson 1200UPHOTO 
that I can use for the Holga negs.

So..Canon or Nikon or something else? Either opinions or links to pre-
existing threads or URL's appreciated.

It's good to be back

Thanks, Tim Timmermans

www.timtimmermans.com

Tim:
I jumped in a few weeks ago. I read a lot of the posts here but 99%
were way over my head. Try it, it's not too hard at all to quickly get
reasonable prints ao you don't get discouraged. Then you can start
learning from there.

After much research, I ended up buying a Minolta Dual Scan II for $280
from B&H. I was put off at first by the low price but it really does
everything you need. And, there is very little lost if you later
decide you want to upgrade and sell it for a substantial discount. I
concluded that 4000 dpi gets lost when you print 8 1/2 x 11 anyway. 

I started using Photoshop Elements. It really does what you need. I've
upgraded to Photoshop 7.0 but haven't used any of the high powered
features yet. I only got it because I've ordered the Piezography inks
and curves. 

Right now, I'm printing on a Epson 1280 with straight black. $370
after rebate. The prints are not bad at all. I'm pleased. Plus it was
a low cost, short learning curve, way to start off. I'll be curious to
see the improvement when I get the quad tone ink set and all the stuff
that goes with it. 

So don't think you have to use all that high powered equipment
everyone talks about here. The lower cost equipment will get you going
and you're not out that much if you later find you need to upgrade.
Just jump in and start doing. If I spent some of the time working
instead of analyzing what to buy, I'd probably be even farther ahead
by now. 

Bob Michaels
Apopka FL

 --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Tim Timmermans"
<bugfoot7@a...> wrote:
> Hi gang,
> 
> I was on this group for a couple of months and then have been gone 
> for 8 months. I missed the wealth of information here. I'm
preparing 
> to take the giant leap into making the best prints I can make. I'll 
> be commiting to some kind of CIS, probably some profiles and 
> calibration tools, new camera gear, new monitor etc etc.
> 
> First up though is a new scanner. I have some budget limitations to 
> around $1000 for a scanner. I'm looking at the Canon FS4000 and the 
> Nikon Coolscan in the same price range. Any opinons would be much 
> appreciated as well as suggestions for other scanners that might be 
> better. Right now I'm pretty much limited to the 35mm format with
on 
> only medium format camera being a Holga. I have an epson 1200UPHOTO 
> that I can use for the Holga negs.
> 
> So..Canon or Nikon or something else? Either opinions or links to
pre-

> existing threads or URL's appreciated.
> 
> It's good to be back
> 
> Thanks, Tim Timmermans
> 
> www.timtimmermans.com

Thanks Bob,

I have been using the Epson 1200UPHOTO flatbed for a couple of years 
and it's not bad for lower end scanner. I suspect the Minolta with 
not be powerful enough for the work I want to do. I would be curious 
as to where you got your 1280 with that rebate. I have one already 
but I'd like to get another one so I can dedicate one to color and 
the other to B/W.

Thanks, Tim

www.timtimmermans.com


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Bob_Michaels" <Bob@B...> 
wrote:
> Tim:
> I jumped in a few weeks ago. I read a lot of the posts here but 99%
> were way over my head. Try it, it's not too hard at all to quickly 
get
> reasonable prints ao you don't get discouraged. Then you can start
> learning from there.
> 
> After much research, I ended up buying a Minolta Dual Scan II for 
$280
> from B&H. I was put off at first by the low price but it really does
> everything you need. And, there is very little lost if you later
> decide you want to upgrade and sell it for a substantial discount. I
> concluded that 4000 dpi gets lost when you print 8 1/2 x 11 anyway. 
> 
> I started using Photoshop Elements. It really does what you need. 
I've
> upgraded to Photoshop 7.0 but haven't used any of the high powered
> features yet. I only got it because I've ordered the Piezography 
inks
> and curves. 
> 
> Right now, I'm printing on a Epson 1280 with straight black. $370
> after rebate. The prints are not bad at all. I'm pleased. Plus it 
was
> a low cost, short learning curve, way to start off. I'll be curious 
to
> see the improvement when I get the quad tone ink set and all the 
stuff
> that goes with it. 
> 
> So don't think you have to use all that high powered equipment
> everyone talks about here. The lower cost equipment will get you 
going

> and you're not out that much if you later find you need to upgrade.
> Just jump in and start doing. If I spent some of the time working
> instead of analyzing what to buy, I'd probably be even farther ahead
> by now. 
> 
> Bob Michaels
> Apopka FL
>

I vote for the Canon FS4000. I bought one and am really happy withit.

Jim
On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 05:07 PM, Tim Timmermans wrote:

>
> So..Canon or Nikon or something else? Either opinions or links to pre-
> existing threads or URL's appreciated.
>
> It's good to be back
>
> Thanks, Tim Timmermans


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Monday, November 11, 2002, 7:01:22 PM, Tim Timmermans wrote:

TT> Thanks Bob,

TT> I have been using the Epson 1200UPHOTO flatbed for a couple of years 
TT> and it's not bad for lower end scanner. I suspect the Minolta with 
TT> not be powerful enough for the work I want to do. I would be curious 
TT> as to where you got your 1280 with that rebate. I have one already 
TT> but I'd like to get another one so I can dedicate one to color and 
TT> the other to B/W.

TT> Thanks, Tim

TT> www.timtimmermans.com


Tim,

I went from a 1200U to a Minolta Dual Scan II a few years ago.  Now
have a Nikon LS-4000 but I recommend the DSII very highly.  Go to my
link below and there's another link to a few scans I did with the
Minolta.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

L i n k s  t o  m y  g a l l e r i e s:
http://fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=246

Again, I'm relatively inexperienced and unsophisticated (no this is 
not one of those porno lines).  I have been unhappy with my B&W scans 
and noticed that a friend had better results with his 
now-out-of-production Agfa duoscan HiD than I do with my approx. $3k 
desktop film scanner.  I've been scouring around on ebay and noticed 
an Agfa T2500 for sale (at a not particularly cheap price) and did a 
little research and have seen that it was there 'top of the line' 
professional scanner.  Capable of 2500 DPI optical res. with pretty 
good numbers.  I now know that the software is at least as important 
as the specs and, as I said the Agfa seems pretty good on that count.
Question:  Anybody familiar with this scanner and its software?  Are 
there any reasons to believe that this type of scanner (dual) can 
compete with a Nikon or Polaroid or Minolta film scanner for B&W 
scanning bragging rights?  Any comments on it?  Lastly, the newer 
Microtek bears a strong family resemblance to the Agfa (someone 
actually said that when Agfa left the scanner business Microtek 
employed their designer) model 1800f; would that be a better unit 
than the Agfa?
Thanks
Marcello
--

Hi Marcel;

I've had scans done with the predecessor to that unit, the 1200 dpi 
Dualscan; They were excellent, very sharp scans that I'm beating 
only in file size with my Nikon 8000ED, and yes the software. Every 
one I know who has owned an AGFA scanner has complained bitterly 
about the interface and its very limited functionality. The Microtek 
is actualy the same machine, with better software. Either wuold do 
quite well for medium or large format, but the file size isn't 
really quite enough for 35mm if you want big prints. Which $3K 
scanner is it you're not happy with?

Steve K

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Marcel Laufer 
<ml12@m...> wrote:
> Again, I'm relatively inexperienced and unsophisticated (no this 
is 
> not one of those porno lines).  I have been unhappy with my B&W 
scans 
> and noticed that a friend had better results with his 
> now-out-of-production Agfa duoscan HiD than I do with my approx. 
$3k 
> desktop film scanner.  I've been scouring around on ebay and 
noticed 
> an Agfa T2500 for sale (at a not particularly cheap price) and did 
a 
> little research and have seen that it was there 'top of the line' 
> professional scanner.  Capable of 2500 DPI optical res. with 
pretty 
> good numbers.  I now know that the software is at least as 
important 
> as the specs and, as I said the Agfa seems pretty good on that 
count.
> Question:  Anybody familiar with this scanner and its software?  
Are 

> there any reasons to believe that this type of scanner (dual) can 
> compete with a Nikon or Polaroid or Minolta film scanner for B&W 
> scanning bragging rights?  Any comments on it?  Lastly, the newer 
> Microtek bears a strong family resemblance to the Agfa (someone 
> actually said that when Agfa left the scanner business Microtek 
> employed their designer) model 1800f; would that be a better unit 
> than the Agfa?
> Thanks
> Marcello
> --

I can agree with the drum scanner routine.. but do be aware of the $$$$ 
involved in repairs and software updates..  Make sure you can have 
someone available to do an install, and run through... yo need a 
moounting station.. and btw-- I use montage gel for wet mounting... 
contact Prazio for scanning needs... 905-873-1857 they have sample kits 
and are very helpful.

I spent $9000 on a high end ICG scanner-- (cost $85,000 in 1996)... then 
spent money on new software, and install.. just to have an ADC board go 
out a year later.. that was very expensive to replace... Still I am much 
happier with the quality of these scans.. than I would be with a Nikon, 
Polaroid, or even an Imacon...

Mark MacKinnon
APA/NY




>mh,
>
>Just keep in mind that these bargain drum scanners like my Howtek are about
>10 years old at this point and repairs are expensive. Someone recently
>bought one with loading station and software for $1,300 but it died almost
>immediately and had to be shipped off to be repaired. Shipping is not a
>trivial matter since they are heavy beasts. Mine weighs 150 pounds and is
>about 24" by 36".
>
>I got mine about a year ago from a company that refurbishes them and
>provides a short 90 day guarantee. So far so good. Altogether I spent just
>under $5000 including the latest version of Silverfast. Prices have dropped
>and you could probably do better now, but some caution is advised. $5,000 is
>a lot but the first four scanners I went through cost a total of $7,100 of
>which I was only able to recoup about $2,500 so I would have saved money if
>I had just gone straight to the Howtek.
>
>Martin Wesley
>
>(snip earlier)
>
>
>
>  
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]